[quote]thabigdon24 wrote:
Arnie better make his mind up if he does this but its going to open up a whole new can of worms if he DOES decide to not do the death penalty , b/c we’ll have inmates writing books, saving the homeless behind bars , all kinds of things in order to get off the death penalty.[/quote]
This was kind of funny. Is it a good thing that we don’t want people on death row doing good things in an attempt to get off?
The Gov. won’t help, it’s over.
One of his victim’s mother was on Fox today. She’ll be there tonight when Tookie gets his shot. She pointed out that his children’s books were written by his girlfriend while he was still claiming to be mentally ill. Supposedly, his children’s books sold about 300 total copies.
Arnold denied his clemency.
God rest his soul.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
thabigdon24 wrote:
Arnie better make his mind up if he does this but its going to open up a whole new can of worms if he DOES decide to not do the death penalty , b/c we’ll have inmates writing books, saving the homeless behind bars , all kinds of things in order to get off the death penalty.
This was kind of funny. Is it a good thing that we don’t want people on death row doing good things in an attempt to get off? [/quote]
Fine. You would have to assume then that somebody behind bars on death row or life would be able to do a lot! They can’t do nearly as much as someone that is let out. Secondly you would have to assume that this somewhat politiking process of making oneself look good has NOTHING to do with getting out but merely to help others. Which you never will be able to do, it will get as bad as things inmates do to look good for parole boards which is notoriously doubtful. If you can satisfy both of these i have no problem with such an outlandish thing you are proposing or have earlier in the thread- that these people that have " redeemed " themselves be taken off death row and probably into prison for life.
The guy was pretty into bodybuilding.
There are at least two good arguments against clemency generally – one from the utilitarian point of view and one from the retribution point of view.
From the utilitarian point of view, you have to allow that the granting of clemency would generally diminish the deterrent effect of the death penalty (assuming it has one, and I think there’s a good argument it does, though it tends to be reduced by such things as clemency, delayed sentences, plea bargains/prosecutorial discretion, etc.).
From the retribution point of view, enforcing the penalty is important because it represents the value to society of the lives taken by the murderer. In addition, because the state has usurped private vengeance, enforcement of the penalty is important to the families of the victims because it is their only legal outlet for recourse. It can be argued that the state has an implicit contract with victims that, in return for disallowing them private vengeneance, it will punish (not rehabilitate, not protect the rest of society from, etc.) the perpetrators of crimes. Given that the death penalty was the punishment handed down by the judge and jury according to the principles of both CA state law and the constitution, the argument would be that the state has the duty to the victims and their families to carry out the sentence.
Now, none of this touches on the power of a governor to pardon. I’ve not really seen a good analysis of factors that a governor “should” use in the exercise of his power – it seems a matter of his personal discretion. From a (very) brief look around though, it seems that people usually cite repentence and cooperation among qualities the convicted need to demonstrate, when they cite anything at all.
[quote]thabigdon24 wrote:
If you can satisfy both of these i have no problem with such an outlandish thing you are proposing or have earlier in the thread- that these people that have " redeemed " themselves be taken off death row and probably into prison for life.
[/quote]
That’s outlandish? It is interesting that no one from the “christian Right” has even taken the stance of forgiveness in terms of the death penalty. I guess that act is very limited.
Most would agree there APPEARS to be bias in the system wrt race.
It has nothing to do with Tookie.
As someone stated…The only issue here is if you personally believe in the death penalty per se. There is no racial bias in his punishment. There was no racial bias in his prosecution.
New to the site. Based on what I have read here so far today, I doubt it is a good idea for a newbie such as myself to chime in to what seems to be the most sensitive category on the site. But I figure I might as well and what better topic to start in but this one.
Admittedly, I haven’t read every word in this thread. It may be pig-headed, but I doubt that it would change my opinion on the subject anyway. I am pro-death penalty. Eye for an eye. Again, may be pig-headed. But that’s how I feel.
I do not feel that the system offers (or really even wants to offer) rehabilitation. Nor do I think it would be effective if it did in most cases.
IMO “finding God” and admitting the error in one’s ways are just for show when it comes to these individuals. Even if it were real, the fact remains that the person in question did commit heinous crimes and deserves what he has coming to him (based on the conviction), regardless of what steps he has taken to become a better person while awaiting the sentence to be carried out.
I suppose that’s the real debate, though. The sentencing specifically. No one is saying he didn’t do it, I guess. But as I said, in my opinion, if you wrongfully take a life (or lives), and a handful of other particularly despicable crimes, you deserve to have yours taken from you.
Sorry if I am getting off on the wrong foot here. Not really trying to get into fights, but I felt like sharing my opinion.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
thabigdon24 wrote:
If you can satisfy both of these i have no problem with such an outlandish thing you are proposing or have earlier in the thread- that these people that have " redeemed " themselves be taken off death row and probably into prison for life.
That’s outlandish? It is interesting that no one from the “christian Right” has even taken the stance of forgiveness in terms of the death penalty. I guess that act is very limited.
[/quote]
Its an outlandish proposal from them to that they should break the law and let people out once they find God. Im not saying that other groups don’t do the same thing, but you are avoiding my arguement and instead objecting to the “outlandish” label im putting on your posts. Are they outlandish? i don’t know but if you disagree i would hope you could refute my 2 points.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
.[/quote]
There have been more white people killed than all other races combined in CA?
If the shoe was on the other foot and another race had the 8-1 ratio would there be a cry of “racism” against the death penalty in CA?
[quote]Professor X wrote:
The guy was pretty into bodybuilding.[/quote]
He still is
You could argue that if that is how you feel about it. How come you never argue in a balanced way?
You could also argue that the need to punish is the important factor, not the need to kill, such that different types of punishement are available, depending on the value to society.
Anyway, this thread, like Tookie, will soon be dead. No clemency. Whether or not there was any truth to his efforts to redeem himself we may never know.
Who said anything about letting people out?
Of course the man has changed, he is 51 years old as opposed to 25 when he killed those folks. I get the impression that the only reason there is any change in the man is that he is now confronting his own mortality. I don’t know this for sure, neither will anyone other than Tookie. Either way, pro or anti death penalty, this is no saint, and its a farce that Sharpton, Jackson, and the list of celebrities are going to make him out to be some kind of martyr. The living victims are the family members of the slain, and any status given to Tookie is a slap in the face of those poor folks.
[quote]vroom wrote:
Its an outlandish proposal from them to that they should break the law and let people out once they find God.
Who said anything about letting people out?[/quote]
get out of death row - they are transferred elsewhere i would think
[quote]Kayrob wrote:
Of course the man has changed, he is 51 years old as opposed to 25 when he killed those folks. I get the impression that the only reason there is any change in the man is that he is now confronting his own mortality. I don’t know this for sure, neither will anyone other than Tookie. Either way, pro or anti death penalty, this is no saint, and its a farce that Sharpton, Jackson, and the list of celebrities are going to make him out to be some kind of martyr. The living victims are the family members of the slain, and any status given to Tookie is a slap in the face of those poor folks.[/quote]
Wow. Well said.
[quote]vroom wrote:
You could also argue that the need to punish is the important factor, not the need to kill, such that different types of punishement are available, depending on the value to society.[/quote]
I completely agree - and the people of California have decided that the proper punishment at this level is the death penalty.
If that view is no longer the case, the legislature need only change that. Till then, follow the law.
[quote]Professor X wrote:
.[/quote]
What is the point of your death row statistics?